Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rozalia Sultangareeva


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Salvio giuliano 21:48, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Rozalia Sultangareeva

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Can't find enough in-depth sourcing from independent, reliable, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG, and does not meet WP:NSCHOLAR.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:00, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete There isn't an article in Russian? No, but there is one in Bashkortian! I didn't know the place, or language existed, let alone that it had a WP! Now I do - and I also know that outside very specific limited interest to a Bashkortian audience, the subject is not notable and does not pass WP:GNG. But interesting, nevertheless... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:08, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women,  and Science.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Bashkir folklore appears to be a very low-citation subject, but if you search Google scholar for Султангареева rather than Sultangareeva you will see 185 citations for "Семейно-бытовой обрядовый фольклор башкирского народ" and 116 for "Жизнь человека в обряде: фольклорно-этнографическое исследование башкирских семейных обрядов" (as well as many less-cited works). I think in this subject that may be enough for WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 13:21, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep, the article would certainly benefit from some cleanup, but generally I do not have any problem. The subject seems to have an impact in their field, got some coverage on the state level, some media coverage, got an article by an academic publisher entirely covering her activity, looks good enough for me.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:22, 2 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.